About Conversion Therapy

A Christian ‘Conversion Therapy Dropout’ on the Supreme Court’s Decision

By Tyler Huckabee

On March 31, the Supreme Court sided with a Christian therapist in Colorado and tossed out the state’s ban on conversion therapy for minors. The therapist, Kaley Chiles, challenged the state’s ban on the grounds that it violated her First Amendment rights. The Court agreed with Chiles by an 8-to-1 vote.

Conversion therapy is a practice that generally involves treatment intended to “cure” same-sex attraction or gender dysphoria. Every major medical study has determined that conversion therapy does not work and often leads to serious mental health problems for patients who are subjected to it. Timothy Schraeder Rodriguez knows that from personal experience.

Rodriguez is the author of Conversion Therapy Dropout: A Queer Story of Faith and Belonging, which will be released on May 5. The memoir unpacks the eight years Rodriguez spent in conversion therapy, struggling to reconcile the tension between the version of Christianity he had been taught growing up and his sexual identity. For Rodriguez, the path to healing began when he accepted that there was no tension.

Rodriguez told Sojourners the Supreme Court’s decision is deeply personal and painful, and he hopes that his story will both help LGBTQ+ Christians feel a little less alone and help convince non-affirming Christians to rethink their convictions.

This conversation has been edited for length and clarity.

Tyler Huckabee, Sojourners: When critics talk about the harm that conversion therapy can cause, particularly for minors, what sort of harm are we talking about?

Timothy Schraeder Rodriguez: Where to begin? There’s documented research to show that anyone who experiences conversion therapy, especially as a minor, is subject to higher rates of depression and anxiety. The suicidal ideation rate nearly doubles for LGBTQ+ youth who have experienced conversion therapy, and then the long-term effect of it tends to show up in the inability to create lasting relationships, substance abuse, all those kinds of things. It’s a very devastating practice in the sense that it attacks body, mind, and spirit. When all three of those parts of yourself have been attacked, disengaging from the harm that that causes takes a lot of time and a lot of real therapy. But a lot of folks who have experienced conversion practices are untrusting of therapeutic spaces.

What arguments did conversion therapy advocates use that convinced the Supreme Court to side with them?

They were able to successfully reduce the idea of what the role of a therapist in a therapeutic setting is: that it’s just a space for conversation, that this is a free speech zone, that this is a space where we should all be allowed to say what we believe. Really, it shifted the definition of what happens in therapists’ office from approved therapeutic practices, to saying, “Well, actually, if a therapist has a different viewpoint, they should be allowed, with their First Amendment right and religious freedom, to be able to interject their own thoughts and go against what has been the conventional therapeutic practices.”

Tell me about your experience with this practice. You call yourself a conversion therapy dropout.

Yeah, I grew up in an evangelical Christian home in Illinois and was insulated in the evangelical Christian culture of the late 1990s and 2000s. Not much was said about homosexuality, but everything around me led me to believe that to be anything but straight was a problem.

So, when I was 19-years-old, I finally admitted for the first time that I was “struggling with same sex attraction,” as I called it back then. I was working at a church in Washington state and was dismissed on the spot for even admitting that it was a struggle that I had. I was told that I was broken and that there was no place for people like me in churches.

I was 19. 

No one forced me in [to conversion therapy]. I opted myself in because I thought that was the only option someone like me had to maintain my relationship with God, my family, my community, the church.

I first was involved with the organization under the umbrella of Exodus International. It was an online forum that existed for folks who didn’t have access to a local ministry in their area. I was a part of that for about a year. I did talk therapy with a therapist for eight years, and then when I moved to Chicago and had access to in-person ministries, I started going to in-person support groups. And then all throughout that, I also attended an annual conference put on by Exodus that was their flagship event. It took a lot of different forms over eight years. It was a wild journey.

When somebody like me hears about conversion therapy, we assume a lot of Jigsaw-type Saw torture traps with gay people being violently forced to recant their sexuality. But in reading your book, you describe it as a process that can be deceptively gentle and cloaked in the language of love and acceptance. You even found some community there.

The experiences that people see portrayed in movies or documentaries—just the lore of conversion therapy—those do exist. But when I encountered conversion therapy, it was much more insidious. I was in talk therapy. I thought I was talking to someone who was trying to help me process my past, but all the information that I gave my therapist was weaponized against me and used as proof as to why I was struggling with what I was struggling with.

And so, from that side, you know, I was trained to moderate myself, to police my mannerisms, to change my behaviors, to change my interests, to try to be more like a man, all those kinds of things. And then there was a spiritual component to it: Pray, seek God, do what all good Christians are supposed to do.

And there was a community component to it. I think it was probably the thing that I’m most grateful for that I got out of it, but also the most dangerous. Most of us were on our own little islands and had no one around us who knew what we were going through. And when we’d go to these groups or go to these events, we’d be around hundreds or thousands of people who were facing the same struggle. There was a camaraderie in the community that formed. Most of us didn’t realize it then, but that was the first time we were ever really, truly experiencing queer community and what it was like to be around others who are like us. Even though we were trying to do all we could to not be ourselves, there was still that underlying connection that bonded us all together. As harmful as all of it was, some of the closest friends that I have in my life today are people that I met in conversion therapy. We were in the trenches together.

But there was an underlying sense throughout all of it that I didn’t measure up, that something was wrong with me because I wasn’t experiencing the change that other people experienced. They were really good in those settings at bringing people out to share their testimonies: “Hey, I went from darkness to light, and here’s my wife and kids! God really can work miracles!” There was this whole system of shame, self-hatred, and self-doubt. But on the surface, it was hard to see that at first.

What was your breaking point with this process?

After eight years, I had done everything. I followed the rule book, and I was also working in evangelical Christian megachurches. I was becoming a rising star in that space for helping churches understand digital marketing and communication. The whole time, I never questioned the program. I was always taught to question myself. If there was something that I wasn’t experiencing, it wasn’t because the program was wrong; it was that there was something in me that wasn’t adding up.

So that was just this constant state of depression and anxiety and fear and all those things raging. I started drinking a lot. I was just a shell of a person. I threw myself into my work, and thought maybe if I just work hard enough, God will finally do the work that I wanted God to do in me.

I was at a big Christian conference—Catalyst—and there was a pastor speaking there, talking about how we needed to fight against gay marriage, that we needed real men, no more sissies, that we needed to fight the gay agenda. And I watched this whole stadium of people erupt and stand on their feet and cheer, knowing that they were talking about me. That led me to have a nervous breakdown.

It just came to a point where I thought I would rather end my life than keep going. But thankfully, I chose to end the way I had been living my life and decided to figure out how I could integrate my faith and sexuality, quit conversion therapy, and figure out what it could look like to become a gay Christian.

There were—especially during the late 2010s—not a lot of openly gay Christian blueprints to follow. Today, many parts of the church obviously remain very hostile to the LGBTQ+ community, and that feeling is often understandably reciprocated. What’s it like having a foot in both worlds?

It’s the weird experience that we carry. I understand why queer people leave the church when they come out, because they’ve been told their whole lives by this particular religious community that they’re broken, that God doesn’t love them, that there’s not a place for them. Why would you want to stay there?

Thankfully, right after I dropped out of conversion therapy, I was connected with Q Christian Fellowship—it was called the Gay Christian Network back then—but it’s one of the leading organizations that’s working with queer Christians to help them reconcile their faith and sexuality.

I went to one of those conferences in 2010, and it was such a weird experience, because it felt just like Exodus or any of the other conferences I had gone to, except it was OK for me to have a crush on other attendees and admit it [laughs]. 

It just exposed me to a whole new way of reading the Bible, understanding what scripture says, and just seeing other folks who were still engaged with their faith. It gave me the hope and courage that I could find affirming spaces where I could be loved and accepted just as I was as a gay man.

So, given all of that, tell me about how it feels to see this ruling come from the Supreme Court, largely on the pretext of religious freedom. I imagine this feels like the war that you experienced within yourself for so long made manifest in the legal system.

It’s disheartening, but it’s not surprising. As long as the church continues to other people and to draw lines around who is accepted, this will, sadly, be a fight we’ll have. I am grateful, though, for the churches that have made room at the table for queer people and that have courageously gone against the conventional wisdom.

But the Christian nationalism that we’re experiencing today is emboldening people to do a lot of horrible things in God’s name. I think people like me are very frustrating to them, because it would be a lot easier for their narrative if I were a person who had been in the church and left it because now I’m gay and hate the church.

But there’s a growing number of us where that’s not the case. We still love God. My relationship with God is stronger today than it ever was when I was in conversion therapy. I’m being fully honest with who I am and who God created me to be.

I hate that my story and my book are very relevant right now, but I’m grateful too. I didn’t have those mentors or those people or that guidebook to follow when I was on this journey early on. I can hopefully help others like myself—that younger version of myself—to know that you know who they are, loved just as they are.

For any queer people reading this—maybe they’re out, maybe they’re not—who are scared or alone, what would your message be?

Take care of yourselves, keep your chosen family close. There are affirming church communities out there. Church Clarity is a great resource that can help you connect with those if you feel like you need that kind of support.

But church can be complicated. Tony Campolo said at that Q Christian conference I went to that the church may be a whore, but she’s your mother. And so remember that what the church did to you is not how God feels about you, and it’s not the truth. Remember that God is love, and God loves you just as you are.

And for folks who have experienced conversion therapy, this is a time for all of us to be emboldened to share our stories. Our lived experience is the thing that can counter all the narratives that are out there now. We can bring a human face and voice to what this decision means, and hopefully, our experience can help the next generation.

I get the sense that there are a lot of Christians who, inside, wish they could be affirming, but don’t feel like they can, maybe because of their jobs, or their community, or just because they feel that the Bible doesn’t allow them to be. That’s a place I know that you yourself were in for quite a while as well. What would you say to them?

Listen to our stories. Talk to queer Christians who have walked this path. Matthew Vines’ book God and the Gay Christian is an excellent starting point just to understand how you can start to look at scripture in a different way and examine all the things that were shoved down all our throats about how we were taught to believe.

Also, look at churches that are affirming and learn from them. See what they’re doing and how they’ve chosen to read scripture and care for and love people.

I didn’t know that affirming denominations existed. I mean, I knew that they did in the ether, but it was a foreign world to me. And I think one of the challenges, particularly for those churches now, is to really become bold in their stance and in how they are speaking about these issues. It is a life-or-death issue, and I think many mainline denominations that have historically been affirming can tend to rest on their laurels. You just start thinking: “Hey, we’ve got this. We’re good. Everyone’s welcome.” But someone like me, who’d never set foot in a church like that, doesn’t even know how to even begin to navigate that space. We see your rainbow flags. We see the “All Are Welcome” signs. But I think that we need some love and coaxing in, just because it feels like we’re crossing an enemy line going into those churches. It felt that way for me at first.

https://sojo.net/sojoshare/MTUyNXwyMzgzOTl8MTc3NTI0MzM0M3w5

A central theme of anti-LGBTQ+ organizing and ideology is the opposition to LGBTQ+ rights or support of homophobia, heterosexism and/or cisnormativity,

I think the article is self explaintary and clear.  The hate directed against the LGBTQ+ seems irrational and immoral.  Why is it immoral if it is being done by religious groups?  Because they have no qualms about lying, giving false and misleading information, and forcing their church doctrines on others who don’t agree with those doctrines. Below are just a few quotes from  the article.  The last one from florida would make pointing out the truth about how a person is acting or speaking illegal, but doing the racist bigoted stuff would stay legal. Hugs

 

  • Anti-trans bathroom bans made a comeback, with four passed in Alabama, Idaho, Ohio and South Carolina.

 

 

  • Florida introduced a bill that limited free speech, making public accusations, whether true or false, of a person being homophobic, transphobic, racist or sexist equivalent to defamation and punishable by fine. The bill did not pass.

 

https://www.splcenter.org/resources/extremist-files/anti-lgbtq/

A central theme of anti-LGBTQ+ organizing and ideology is the opposition to LGBTQ+ rights or support of homophobia, heterosexism and/or cisnormativity, often expressed through demonizing rhetoric and grounded in harmful pseudoscience that portrays LGBTQ+ people as threats to children, society and often public health.

Top Takeaways

In 2024, the number of anti-LGBTQ+ groups increased by about 13% from the previous year. Anti-LGBTQ+ groups maintained a trend in heavy mobilization across multiple strategies with increasing political and financial support from the hard right.

Anti-trans narratives were instrumental to the 2024 election at all levels of government, especially at the local level where anti-LGBTQ+ and anti-inclusive education activism continue to heavily overlap. The politicization of gender-affirming health care and LGBTQ+-inclusive school curricula contributed to what has been characterized as the “most Anti-LGBTQ election in decades.” Republicans spent almost $215 Million on TV ads to smear trans people, surpassing ads on rival issues such as economy, immigration and housing. Another wave of anti-LGBTQ+ legislation broke records at state and federal levels, but such bills were not as nearly as successful as last year.

Anti-LGBTQ+ groups are heavily invested in the courts and pushing policy change by judicial decision. Hard right and anti-LGBTQ+ extremists on social media continue their campaign to “make pride toxic” by targeting inclusive business and marketing practices while anti-LGBTQ+ legal groups take up administrative law and lobbying strategies to eliminate diversity, equity, and inclusion practices in the public and private sectors under the guise of “viewpoint diversity” and “religious freedom” advocacy.  

Key Moments

Throughout the state legislative sessions, anti-LGBTQ+ movement organizations continued their facilitation of a decades long effort to foment anti-trans moral panic in public discourse. Legislative assaults broke records for the fifth consecutive year, albeit with fewer successes.

Several factors slowed the trend, including coordinated community responses and reporting, such as the SPLC’s Project CAPTAIN, on the networks that perpetuate anti-LGBTQ+ talking points and legislation. Legislation trends of concern include:

A Florida bill promoted insurance coverage conversion therapy for detransition. The bill passed the House, but died in the Senate.

  • Anti-trans bathroom bans made a comeback, with four passed in Alabama, Idaho, Ohio and South Carolina.
  • Policy changes enacted barriers to gender markers and name changes for IDs/personal documents in Arkansas and Florida.
  • Florida introduced a bill that limited free speech, making public accusations, whether true or false, of a person being homophobic, transphobic, racist or sexist equivalent to defamation and punishable by fine. The bill did not pass.

In February 2024, anti-trans influencers spun a disinformation campaign to exploit the tragic shooting at Lakewood Church in Houston by alleging the shooter was trans. Hard-right social media influencers, equipped with talking points that help fuel gun purchases, used this and other mass shootings in 2024 to perpetuate anti-immigrant and anti-trans conspiracy theories. Despite claiming anti-trans activism helps “protect children,” the SPLC reported that in the wake of mass shootings, anti-trans extremists divert attention from meaningful reforms to prevent gun violence, which is the leading cause of death for children in the United States.

In response to online campaigns by hard-right social media personalities, many major brands scaled back Pride merchandise in 2024. Armed Conflict Location and Event Data (ACLED) reported anti-LGBTQ+  protests at Pride events decreased in 2024; however, GLAAD documented 110 anti-LGBTQ+ incidents during June 2024. In addition, the SPLC monitored at least 74 bomb threats targeting LGBTQ people and events between January 1 and June 30, 2024.

The Colorado Republican Party posted “Burn all the #pride flags this June” and shared a video clip titled “God Hate F__s.” There was no shortage of vandalism: In Poulsbo, Washington, 14 Pride banners were slashed, and over 200 pride flags were stolen from the town center in Carlisle, Massachusetts. Throughout June, SPLC tracked dozens of protests, bomb threats and harassment campaigns directed at civil society groups like Pride committees and LGBTQ+-inclusive religious congregations. Hate groups including MassResistance, Gays Against Groomers, Protect Texas Kids, White Lives Matter, and Aryan Freedom Network were active at Pride events in June 2024.

In July and August 2024, anti-trans influencers manufactured controversy over the gender identity of Olympic athletes Imane Khelif and Lin Yu-ting. This anti-trans controversy exclusively targeted Taiwanese and Algerian athletes, scrutinizing the legitimacy of their womanhood. The crux of arguments made by the anti-trans actors re-animated misogynoir stereotypes to exclude women of color from being considered women based on white Eurocentric beauty standards of femininity. The series of events suggests eugenics and racism underlie transphobia and exhibited how anti-trans hysteria disproportionately impacts women of color on an international scale.

In September 2024, the anti-LGBTQ+ hate group Family Research Council held its annual Pray Vote Stand conference. FRC hosted a variety of anti-immigrant commentary ranging from Katy Faust, president of the anti-LGBTQ+ hate group Them Before Us, urging attendees to “breed out” immigrants and trans people. At the conference, Oklahoma superintendent of public instruction Ryan Walters alleged illegal immigrants were bringing fentanyl into schools; and the summit featured population control myths espoused by both anti-abortion and anti-vax panelists. FRC devoted multiple plenary sessions to anti-trans, anti-abortion and anti-immigrant coded topics.

The election of the first trans member of congress, Sarah McBride, was immediately met with a trans bathroom ban on all restrooms on the House side of the Capitol complex. The resolution was introduced by Nancy Mace and supported by House Speaker and former Alliance Defending Freedom attorney Mike Johnson. Mace posted anti-trans slurs on X following a bathroom sit-in at the Capitol in protest of the bathroom ban. The protesters were arrested and taken to the Capitol Police station; Mace then posted a video showing her outside the stations saying, “Some tr——s got arrested protesting my ban.” She then began reading them their Miranda rights along with demeaning commentary about the protesters.

On Dec. 4 the Supreme Court heard a challenge to the Tennessee ban on gender-affirming care for minors. Over 20 anti-LGBTQ+ and antigovernment groups filed amicus briefs in support of the ban, including Gays Against Groomers (GAG), American College of Pediatricians (ACPeds), American Family Association (AFA), Family Research Council (FRC) and Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF). Groups and individuals associated with a network of anti-LGBTQ+ pseudoscience purveyors filed another 10% of the amici opposing gender-affirming healthcare.

What’s Ahead

States will continue to be labs for experimenting with anti-LGBTQ+ public policy. The legislative early filing period in Texas shows 32 anti-trans bills already filed for the 2025 legislative session. This year will show a continued pressure on erasing trans people from public life. With Donald Trump’s re-election, federal civil rights enforcement litigation will likely swing against LGBTQ+ inclusion.

Authors of Project 2025 are being tapped as cabinet picks for the second Trump administration. Project 2025 is an authoritarian and theocratic road map, and anti-trans scapegoating makes up key policy recommendations.

Background

Anti-LGBTQ+ groups in the United States oppose LGBTQ+ rights but also generally support heterosexism, an ideology that assumes heterosexuality is the only “normal” sexuality, and/or cisnormativity, an ideology that assumes one’s gender identity always matches the sex one was assigned at birth. Anti-LGBTQ+ groups primarily consist of Christian Right groups but also include such organizations as the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) that purport to be scientific. Anti-LGBTQ+ groups in America have employed a variety of strategies in their efforts to oppose LGBTQ+ rights or support heterosexism and/or cisnormativity, including engaging in the crudest type of name-calling.

Anti-LGBTQ+ groups on the SPLC hate list often link being LGBTQ+ inherently to criminal behavior; claim that the marriage equality and LGBTQ+ people in general are dangers to children and families; contend that being LGBTQ+ itself is dangerous and support the criminalization of LGBTQ+ people and transgender identity. These groups also believe in a false conspiracy that LGBTQ+ people seek to destroy Christianity and the whole of society. More recently, hard-line anti-LGBTQ+ groups have promoted their discriminatory laws and policies that limit the rights of LGBTQ people under the guise of religion, blurring the lines between the separation of church and state and discarding anti-discrimination civil rights policies. These same groups have promoted legislative models to push anti-trans legislation into law under a conservative religious assumption that gender can only be understood as either “male” or “female.”

Many leaders and spokespeople of SPLC-designated anti-LGBTQ+ groups have used degrading and derogatory language to describe LGBTQ+ people. Others disseminate disparaging information about LGBTQ+ people that are simply untrue – an approach no different from how white supremacists and nativist extremists propagate lies about African American people and immigrants to make these communities seem like a danger to society. Viewing LGBTQ+ people as unbiblical or simply opposing marriage equality does not qualify an organization to be listed as an anti-LGBTQ+ hate group.

2024 Anti-LGBTQ+ Hate Groups

Map outline of US states with number of anti-lgbtq+ hate groups.

* – Asterisk denotes headquarters.

Abiding Word Baptist Church, Revival Baptist Church
Orange Park, Florida

Advocates Protecting Children
Arlington, Virginia

Alliance Defending Freedom
Scottsdale, Arizona

American College of Pediatricians
Gainesville, Florida

American Family Association
Indianapolis, Indiana
Tupelo, Mississippi *
Franklin, Pennsylvania

American Vision
Powder Springs, Georgia

Americans for Truth About Homosexuality
Columbus, Ohio

ATLAH Media Network
New York, New York

California Family Council
Fresno, California

The Campus Ministry USA
Terre Haute, Indiana

Center for Christian Virtue
Columbus, Ohio

Center for Family and Human Rights (C-FAM)
New York, New York*
Washington, D.C.

Chalcedon Foundation
Vallecito, California

Child and Parental Rights Campaign
Johns Creek, Georgia

Church Militant/St. Michael’s Media
Ferndale, Michigan

Concerned Christian Citizens
Temple, Texas

D. James Kennedy Ministries
Fort Lauderdale, Florida

Do No Harm
Glen Allen, Virginia

Faith2Action
North Royalton, Ohio

Faithful Word Baptist Church
Tempe, Arizona

Straight Paths Baptist Church
Tucson, Arizona

Family Action Council of Tennessee
Franklin, Tennessee

The Family Foundation of Virginia
Richmond, Virginia

Family Policy Alliance
Colorado Springs, Colorado

Family Research Council
Washington, D.C.

Family Research Institute
Colorado Springs, Colorado

Family Watch International
Gilbert, Arizona

First Works Baptist Church
Anaheim, California

Florida Family Voice
Orlando, Florida

Focus on the Family
Colorado Springs, Colorado

Frontline Policy Council
Atlanta, Georgia

Gays Against Groomers
Fountain Hills, Arizona
California
Georgia
Kansas City, Missouri
Monroe, North Carolina
Vancouver, Washington
Milwaukee, Wisconsin*

Generations
Elizabeth, Colorado

Genspect
Chicago, Illinois

Heterosexuals Organized for a Moral Environment (H.O.M.E.)
Downers Grove, Illinois

Illinois Family Institute
Tinley Park, Illinois

Liberty Baptist Church
Rock Falls, Illinois

Liberty Counsel
Orlando, Florida

Louisiana Family Forum
Baton Rouge, Louisiana

MassResistance
Torrance, California
Pocatello, Idaho
Idaho
Waltham, Massachusetts*
New Jersey
Fort Worth, Texas
Houston, Texas
Kenosha, Wisconsin
Gilette, Wyoming
Lander, Wyoming

Massachusetts Family Institute
Wakefield, Massachusetts

Mission: America
Columbus, Ohio

Montana Family Foundation
Laurel, Montana

Pacific Justice Institute
Sacramento, California
Santa Ana, California
Miami, Florida
Mississippi
Reno, Nevada
Salem, Oregon
Seattle, Washington

Partners for Ethical Care
Chicago, Illinois

Pass the Salt Ministries
Hebron, Ohio

Pennsylvania Family Institute
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania

Pilgrims Covenant Church
Monroe, Wisconsin

The Pray In Jesus Name Project
Colorado Springs, Colorado

Probe Ministries
Plano, Texas

Public Advocate of the United States
Merrifield, Virginia

Revival Baptist Church
Clermont, Florida

Ruth Institute
Lake Charles, Louisiana

Save California
Sacramento, California

Scott Lively Ministries
Springfield, Massachusetts

Society for Evidence-Based Gender Medicine
Twin Falls, Idaho

Stedfast Baptist Church
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Cedar Hills, Texas *

Strong Hold Baptist Church
Norcross, Georgia

Sure Foundation Baptist Church
Indianapolis, Indiana
Vancouver, Washington*
Seattle, Washington
Spokane Valley, Washington

Them Before Us
Seattle, Washington

Tom Brown Ministries
El Paso, Texas

True Light Pentecost Church
Spartanburg, South Carolina

United Families International
Gilbert, Arizona

Verity Baptist Church
Sacramento, California

Warriors for Christ
Mount Juliet, Tennessee

Westboro Baptist Church
Topeka, Kansas

World Congress of Families/International Organization for the Family
Rockford, Illinois

Earth Month On Friday

Earth Month Ecochallenge, running from April 1st to April 30th, is a 30-day program focused on environmental and social engagement. During this month, you’re invited to select actions that resonate with your values, committing to them for 30 days to foster and reinforce positive habits. Each action you complete earns points and generates real-world impact. Your efforts, combined with those of your team, contribute to a significant collective difference.

This year’s theme, People and Planet: Resilient Together, focuses on resilience: the capacity to adapt, recover, and grow stronger through change. Resilience lives in people, in communities, and in the natural systems that sustain us. In a world shaped by uncertainty, it helps us stay grounded, connected, and capable of creating positive change. Our new actions and categories will help you explore resilience at many levels – personal, in your community, in the organizations you are part of, and in nature. (snip)

https://earthmonth.ecochallenge.org/challenges

2 Items Regarding Book Bans, & Time Travel For World Improvement

What to Know About the National Book Ban Bill

House Resolution 7661 is a potentially significant piece of book ban legislation. Here’s what you need to know about it.

On March 17, the U.S. House Committee on Education and the Workforce advanced H.R. 7661. There is no word regarding when the bill will be voted on, but the vote is expected to occur sometime in the coming weeks. While that bill number may not sound familiar, there’s a good chance you have recently heard it referred to as the National Book Ban Bill.

Though that title is not formally associated with the proposed resolution, it does speak to the concerns many have regarding the bill’s language, intentions, and potential long-term impact. While it can understandably feel overwhelming to keep up with every potentially impactful piece of legislation in the modern United States government, the details of H. R. 7661 (including those not printed, which only exist between the lines) make it worth knowing about for anyone who opposes the growing trend of book bans and public education funding.

What is H. R. 7661, or the Stop the Sexualization of Children Act?

Formally, what is sometimes referred to as the National Book Ban Bill is being presented as H.R. 7661 or the “Stop the Sexualization of Children Act.” You can read that act here. It has also been referred to as the “National Don’t Say Gay bill,” a reference to a 2022 statute that triggered significant school policy changes, including legislation that restricted public schools from introducing material in kindergarten through 3rd-grade classrooms that was deemed to be related to matters of sexual orientation and gender identity. The law also included requirements specific to students in higher grades and age ranges.

A sweeping initiative, the Don’t Say Gay bill (formally referred to as the “Parental Rights in Education” bill) established several education restrictions regarding both curricula and school policies that could be enforced via various means (including potential legal action). It required schools to inform parents if their children received any mental health services at school, it allowed parents to have greater access to formerly private documents related to their kids, and it enacted a series of moderation policies that effectively enabled legislators to have greater control over what is (and isn’t) taught to students in those age ranges via funding decisions and similar policies. Said policies included book bans, which are also at the heart of H.R. 7661’s many potential effects.

The Main Provisions of H. R. 7661

The primary purpose of H. R. 7661 is to enable the U.S. government to deny federal funding to schools that use those funds for programs and materials the bill deems to be inappropriate.

The bill is effectively an amendment to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. The act was designed to provide expanded federal funding to public schools to ensure that their students (more specifically, public school students in lower-income areas) didn’t continue to fall far behind students at schools with access to more resources. It was a milestone piece of legislation that remains one of the cornerstones for federal public school funding in the United States to this day.

While H. R. 7661 would not eliminate that act, it would, in the bill’s own language, “prohibit the use of funds provided under such Act to develop, implement, facilitate, host, or promote any program or activity for, or to provide or promote literature or other materials to, children under the age of 18 that includes sexually oriented material, and for other purposes.”

The broad nature of that language is one of the more controversial aspects of the bill. For instance, it would deny schools the ability to use federal funding for programs, literature, and related texts that include “sexually oriented material” and “material that exposes such children to nude adults, individuals who are stripping, or lewd or lascivious dancing.” H. R. 7661 also includes exemptions for scientific texts, works related to major religions, as well as “classic works of literature” and “classic works of art” (more on those in a bit) that may naturally include references to the content it intends to restrict. Furthermore, the authors of the bill note that “sexually oriented material” includes “any depiction, description, or simulation of sexually explicit conduct (as defined in subparagraphs (A) and (B) of section 2256(2) of title 18, United States Code).” You can read those United States Code subparagraphs here. They largely reference material such as “bestiality” and “sadistic or masochistic abuse” but also include the far more general idea of “sexual intercourse… whether between persons of the same or opposite sex” as sexually explicit content. It is a rather large collection of topics which could potentially fall under that umbrella definition.

However, H. R. 7661 would expand the definition of “sexually oriented material” to include material that “involves gender dysphoria or transgenderism.” Along with suggesting that matters of identity should be considered a sexually obscene topic, the inclusion of that language has significant legal implications. That choice of wording makes it clear that this bill will most directly and immediately affect transgender students, transgender-related materials, and it could be argued, gender non-conformity topics in general, which may include discussions of specifically prohibited subjects in affected schools. 

What’s important to remember is that the bill specifies works that will be excluded, but it is more vague regarding what, exactly, could be impacted. It could, for instance, be determined that a variety of LGBTQIA+ books that make passing reference (or even perceived passing references) to such materials could also be effectively banned from federally funded schools. The policies for such determinations and review procedures are not set. It should also be noted that the use of “sexually oriented material” and similar pieces of broad language have often been contested as the basis for similar pieces of legislation (more on those below). 

There are undoubtedly concerns regarding the direct targeting of students and materials that would be most obviously impacted by the “gender dysphoria or transgenderism” language. The reason that this is being referred to as a “National Book Ban Bill,” though, is due to both the bill’s relationship with current federal funding policies (and thus its potential reach) and the ways that its language could be used to legally justify a variety of bans or create a precedent for similarly sweeping bills. 

What Would Happen If H. R. 7661 Passes?

(snip-More, at link right up there. Go read it, so you know what we each need to know-)


Five Time Travel Stories About Taking Out Hitler

Exploring very different takes on a familiar thought experiment.

By Lorna Wallace

It’s a familiar question in time travel narratives: If you could go back in time and kill Adolf Hitler, would you? Sometimes, of course, there are time travel rules in place that prevent such interference; for instance, in About Time (2013) time travelers can only go back to moments in their own pasts. But there are plenty of other stories where the opportunity does present itself (although not everyone is able to follow through with it, including antihero Deadpool).

While the basic premise—removing Hitler from existence in some way (often as a baby, or before he can be born)—is sometimes only briefly touched on in time travel narratives, there are a number of stories that explore the problems and ramifications of such an action in a bit more depth. Here are five short stories (well, four stories and one comic, which is arguably a short story with art) that do just that.

I Killed Hitler” by Ralph Milne Farley (1941)

Just a few years into World War II—before America had even joined the fight—Ralph Milne Farley wrote the earliest known story about using time travel to kill Hitler. The unnamed main character is one of the Nazi leader’s distant cousins but he lives half a world away in Massachusetts. He’s deeply unhappy about Hitler’s warmongering—partly because the genocidal leader’s actions are unequivocally wrong, but also partly (and honestly… largely) because being drafted into the war is going to interfere with our narrator’s painting career.

After complaining to a friend about all the Allies who haven’t taken the chance to assassinate Hitler during their face-to-face meetings, our protagonist gets the chance to go back in time and murder the Führer while he’s still a young boy. Although the outcome is now a fairly basic rendition of the theme, this story remains notable for being the first take on the idea.

I Killed Adolf Hitler” by Jason (2006)

Set in a world where being a killer-for-hire is a legitimate profession, this comic book sees our protagonist, an anthropomorphic dog who is once again unnamed, take on an unusual job: killing Hitler. The time machine that sends him back only has enough energy for one round trip every 50 years, so it’s crucial that he doesn’t mess it up—which, of course, he does. Not only does he fail to kill Hitler, but the Führer uses the time machine’s one ride back to the present and then promptly blends in with modern society.

Our hitman still needs to finish the job, though, and now he’s tasked with tracking down the Nazi leader, in spite of the fact that he’s much older once he’s caught up to his target (because, after being stranded in the past, he had to live through the years to get back to the present). He decides to enlist the help of his (now much younger) ex-girlfriend and the journey they go on together is filled with both dry humor and unexpectedly tender moments. Sure, their goal might be murder, but there’s still room for touching character growth along the way…

Missives from Possible Futures #1: Alternate History Search Results” by John Scalzi (2007)

Written in the second person, this short story sees you sampling a technology called Multiversity™, which is essentially Google Search for the multiverse. You enter “THE DEATH OF ADOLF HITLER”—one of the most popular searches—and are shown eight sample realities based on the various ways that Hitler has died in alternate histories. This story is short and sweet, with only a few sentences outlining each scenario (although you’re informed that you can get a more detailed breakdown for the low, low price of $59.95!).

The hilarious scenarios become increasingly unhinged (and one does explicitly feature time travel!), but because there are only eight I don’t want to spoil any of them by going into too much detail, here. What I will say is that I would absolutely pay to find out more about the squids in Scenario #8…

This short story served as the basis for the “Alternate Histories” episode in the first season of Love, Death & Robots—so if this concept seems familiar to you, that might be why.

Wikihistory” by Desmond Warzel (2011)

“Wikihistory” is written entirely as a series of online forum posts from members of the International Association of Time Travelers. The first post in the story comes from FreedomFighter69, a new member of the IATT who is celebrating their first excursion: going to the opening of the 1936 Olympic Games to kill Hitler. SilverFox316 is none too impressed with this move and a few minutes later posts to say that they’ve successfully gone back and stopped FreedomFighter69. Much to the frustration of SilverFox316, new members continue making this same mistake (which could be avoided if they’d simply read Bulletin 1147 as they’ve been repeatedly asked to do!).

The forum format is inventive, the time travel plot is chaotically fun, and the bickering dynamic between the posters feels hilariously true to life.

It’s OK to Say if You Went Back in Time and Killed Baby Hitler” by Jo Lindsay Walton (2018)

This is another short story written in the second person; this time you’re a member of a small group of anti-fascists intent on using a time travel rig to kill baby Hitler. Umeko volunteers for the gruesome mission and when she returns, she’s confident that she got the job done. But then she learns that history hasn’t changed, which makes no sense because she’s certain that she beheaded baby Hitler.

While the group squabble over this unexpected result, you as the protagonist take the opportunity to slip into the rig and go back to 1890 to figure out what went wrong with the original mission. You get your answer, but unfortunately both time travel and group projects are a very messy business, so combining the two isn’t exactly a recipe for success.


Although using time travel to put an end to Hitler and his rise to power is a fairly well-trodden trope at this point, hopefully this list has proven that there are still plenty of creative ways to tell this kind of story. I’d love to hear if you have any particularly intriguing, thoughtful, and/or original stories that riff on this theme, regardless of format!

(no snip; they’re all here.)

Perkins Celebrates SCOTUS Ruling On Ex-Gay Torture Because “God Created” All People To Be Heterosexuals

Remember a couple of things as you read this below.  First there is nothing wrong with being LGBTQ+ and the feelings associated with those letters.  Second most children are desperate to fit in to the majority, to be “normal”.  The country was well on the way to reassuring these kids / adults that those feelings were normal and OK.  That the child was not damaged not an abomination to god, and did not need to be fixed.  Then the right wing religious hate machine managed to pass don’t say gay laws, bathroom bills, and “lets make those who are not straight or cis be attacked outcasts again” laws. 

There are two errors not really mentioned here. Minors who are going to these “religious anti-LGBTQ+ be straight cis only” therapest  / religious leaders are normally forced there by parents who have been convinced by religious leaders in their church that their child is damaged and needs to be fixed as they are sinning just for feeling as they do and so will be going to hell.  (Side note Jesus never said anything like that.  I remember being told that I was “acting gay / doing gay things” because I liked sinning.  To which I replied, You have it backwards.  I was born gay and I like doing / being gay and so I don’t care that it is sinning to you.)  The child is often told this to the point where even if they don’t fully hate themselves they are willing to do anything their parents want to “be normal” or get their parents off their backsides about it. And often the child is threatened with being thrown out of the home if they don’t go to conversion therapy.  And then the religious therapist reinforces the message that they are damaged, broken, that they cannot be as they are but must be fixed, must be healed of the sin / feelings.  Every major medical association has reviewed and studied conversion therapy and they conclude it is harmful, has no basis in science and those kids who go through it are far more likely to try to end their lives  so they recommend helping young people to accept themselves and their feelings except for the minor one started by a religious group that has rejected all the studies and findings for the religious belief that god wouldn’t create anyone that way and because we are not that so those people / kids that feel that way must be forced to change to make them and their god happy.  

There are facts, and then there are religious beliefs that disregard those facts.  The fact is that the data and medical studies show that helping non-straight non-cis children accept that they are normal also shows that gender afirming care is the most beneficial way to help young people who are LGBTQ+ and struggling with the idea of wanting to be “normal” or like the other students are.  I did not want to be gay as a kid growing up. I knew my attraction perhaps sooner than most kids due to my childhood situation. But all the time growing up I heard about how bad and horrible people who had the feelings I did were and how doing what I was being forced to do made me the worst possible human.  I was attacked at school even though I was not out but some thought I was different and that was enough.  When I had to join the church to get to leave my abusive home to get to safety I heard constantly how bad / sinfull / an abomination I and people like me were to god who wanted mankind to wipe me out… wait why does god need mankind to do that, especially white Christian men to do that, can’t he just stop making  gay people with out a demon in them? 

At my church school a lot of the boys were flirting with same sex attractions as they were horny teen boys separated from girls. Similar to the situation I found in the military where I had a group of “straight” guys asking me to go on passes with them.  And it was very fun, but they always claimed not to be able to remember what happened on those trips.  But each of those kids and some of those adults I had consensual fun with blamed themselves for failing god and failing to be normal.  I had one really cute fun guy who I would go on passes with who couldn’t wait to get into the hotel room to have sex.  And it was not just one way either.  He received as he gave and what he enjoyed he returned if you catch my trying not to be too explicit. But that was the same with all the guys, they were not hung up on straight norms while in a hotel room with me.  But this one guy would always on the way back to base tell me we couldn’t do that again.  It was wrong.  It was something we shouldn’t do.  I did not argue.  But 3 weeks or a month later he was begging me to go on a four day pass with him.   

My point was this guy was 18 / 19 like me.  I had already long accepted who I was and how I felt. He had taken the be normal message to heart.  He could have used therapy to accept his feelings and needs.  But the one thing he did not need and would have been harmful was conversion therapy. That guy was with me in Germany, after a wonderful weekend he again said we couldn’t do that again,  He got married and it lasted a year, then he got divorced.  I lost touch with him.  But lives were harmed because he just couldn’t face he was gay, couldn’t tell his religious parents he was gay, and would have been placed in conversion therapy if his parents had known as a teen he struggled with same sex attraction and was not straight. Hugs

 

Perkins Celebrates SCOTUS Ruling On Ex-Gay Torture Because “God Created” All People To Be Heterosexuals

From the Family Research Council’s website:

The Supreme Court on Tuesday delivered a major win for the free speech rights of counselors and therapists, ruling in an 8-1 decision that a Colorado law prohibiting licensed counselors from engaging in talk therapy to help a person “reduce or eliminate unwanted sexual attractions, change sexual behaviors, or grow in the experience of harmony with [their] bod[ies]” unconstitutionally violated the First Amendment right to freedom of speech.

FRC President Tony Perkins called the decision “A Supreme Court win for free speech and biological reality.”

“I’m encouraged to see the muzzle removed from therapists seeking to help willing patients come to terms with, and be at peace with, how God created them,” reflected Perkins in a statement to The Washington Stand.

“The Left is using the levers of government to block families and individuals seeking help. Under Colorado law, a girl could legally seek a therapist’s help to change her gender but could not seek help from that same therapist to align her identity with her biological sex. Where is the fairness or logic in that? I commend the court for striking down this deeply invasive and unjust law.”

Read the full article. In 2013, Exodus International – then the nation’s largest ex-gay group – disbanded. Its longtime president Alan Chambers declared that not one of his group’s thousands of victims had ever become heterosexual.

Conversion therapy is discredited junk science that inflicts harm on LGBTQ youth.The Supreme Court’s decision is disappointing and puts vulnerable kids at risk.

Governor Gavin Newsom (@governor.ca.gov) 2026-03-31T17:09:16.486Z

 


 

World Autism Day/Month

Be Careful Of Wolves In Sheep’s Clothing

Graham Platner, Donald Trump, and Gender

By Cheryl Rofer

Graham Platner, son of wealthy parents, is cosplaying as a salt-of-the earth oyster farmer who sells his product to his mother and is running to become the Democratic candidate for Senate in Maine, against Susan Collins. He was outed as having a Nazi tattoo, which he had tattooed over with a slightly less Nazi tattoo. His earlier writings and activities include slurs against women and wearing a Blackwater hat to own the libs.

He is now running ahead of Governor Janet Mills, who is an older woman but who actually has experience in government, something Platner lacks.

Why is Platner doing so well? We can look to Donald Trump for that.

All of our politics today are gender politics. It’s very difficult to talk about that, because it permeates everything we do, leaving us fish unaware of the water. The response is frequently that no, it’s something else, maybe power. But power is gender infused too. So let’s focus on gender if only for the amusement of seeing something through a new lens.

We have multiple models in our heads of what women and men are. Mute eye candy, intellectual, blue collar are some general descriptors, but more specifically, we associate particular groups of characteristics with particular manifestations of gender. Graham Platner and Donald Trump are avatars of a particular way to be a man. I will enumerate some of them.

Men tell it like it is. This means that they can say things that are associated with this type of masculinity, like referring to women by their genitals and using slurs against other groups that are not able-bodied white men.

Men are muscular and do hard work. This means that blue-collar men are Real Men™.

Men are strong. This is different from being muscular, but the two bleed into each other. A man can take on emotionally difficult tasks and bull his way through.

Men never apologize. From what I have read, Platner has acknowledged the tattoo and his earlier actions but has not apologized. Trump, well.

Men are by nature fit to lead. Platner has no experience in government, as was the case with Trump in 2016. But they were/are questioned very little on this issue.

Men may become violent. Platner was in the military and Blackwater, with a violent tattoo. Trump shouts, rages, and talks about violence all the time.

To my mind, this type of masculinity is disqualifying for elected office. But obviously others disagree.

He’s a plain-talking guy you could have a beer with. Or at least a man could have a beer with. The comfort factor is enormous, and Platner and Trump give people permission to be comfortable in a particular way. Ezra Klein interviewed (gift link) one of conservatism’s intellectuals, Christopher Caldwell. Caldwell writes at the Claremont Review of Books and is one of the New York Times’s resident conservatives.

One of the things he settles on as an aspect of Trumpism is what he calls free speech. He has felt throttled by woke and was delighted to be able to be comfortable in what he says. That banker interviewed by the Financial Times said it out loud: He can say the “r” word and refer to women’s bodies in conversation. It’s what all conservatives mean by “free speech,” sometimes with Nazi phrases or concepts thrown in. When they say “free speech,” they mean whatever speech white men in charge want to use.

Those “free speech” advocates are given permission to speak freely by Platner and Trump.

There are other reasons people vote for men displaying this cluster of traits considered masculine. It’s a comfortable stereotype – much in the media and what people who don’t have close contact with blue-collar men may believe of them.

Even Rahm Emanuel feels he has to put on a muscular performance of eating his salad.

Trump’s Justice Department Dropped 23,000 Criminal Investigations in Shift to Immigration

Trump’s Justice Department Dropped 23,000 Criminal Investigations in Shift to Immigration

Reporting Highlights

  • A Striking Departure: The number of declinations marks a striking departure not only from the Biden administration but also the first Trump term, according to the ProPublica analysis.
  • An Unusual Order: Former DOJ prosecutors said that they regularly reviewed caseloads. But none could recall an order like the one in February to review cases.
  • Different Priorities: While Elon Musk’s DOGE operatives said they were rooting out federal waste, fraud and abuse, the DOJ declined over 900 cases of federal program or procurement fraud.

These highlights were written by the reporters and editors who worked on this story.

In the first days after Pam Bondi was appointed attorney general last year, the Department of Justice began shutting down pending criminal cases at a record pace.

The cases included an investigation into a Virginia nursing home with a recent record of patient abuse; probes of fraud involving several New Jersey labor unions, including one opened after a top official of a national union was accused of embezzlement; and an investigation into a cryptocurrency company suspected of cheating investors.

In total, the DOJ quietly closed more than 23,000 criminal cases in the first six months of President Donald Trump’s administration, abandoning hundreds of investigations into terrorism, white-collar crime, drugs and other offenses as it shifted resources to pursue immigration cases, according to an analysis by ProPublica.

The bulk of these cases, which were closed without prosecution and known as declinations, had been referred to the DOJ by law enforcement agencies under prior administrations that believed a federal crime may have been committed. The DOJ routinely declines to prosecute cases for any number of reasons, including insufficient evidence or because a case is not a priority for enforcement.

But the number of declinations under Bondi marks a striking departure not only from the Biden administration but also the first Trump term, according to the ProPublica analysis, which examined two decades of DOJ data, including the first six months of Trump’s second term. ProPublica determined the increase is not the result of inheriting a larger caseload or more referrals from law enforcement.

In February 2025 alone, which included the first weeks of Bondi’s tenure, nearly 11,000 cases were declined, the most in a month since at least 2004. The previous high was just over 6,500 cases in September 2019, during Trump’s first administration.

Some of the cases shut down were the result of years long investigations by federal agencies such as the FBI and the Drug Enforcement Administration. For complex cases, the DOJ can take years before deciding whether to bring charges.

The shift comes as the DOJ has undergone an extraordinary overhaul under the Trump administration, with entire units shuttered, directives to abandon pursuit of certain crimes and thousands of lawyers quitting or, in some cases, being forced out of the agency.

In doing so, the DOJ is retreating from its mission to impartially uphold the rule of law, keep the country safe and protect civil rights, according to interviews with a dozen prosecutors and an open letter from nearly 300 DOJ employees who have left the department under Trump. The Trump DOJ, the employees wrote, is “taking a sledgehammer” to long-standing work to “protect communities and the rule of law.”

The change in priorities was outlined in a series of memos sent to attorneys early last year. Trump’s DOJ has said it is “turning a new page on white-collar and corporate enforcement” and emphasizing the pursuit of drug cartels, illegal immigrants and institutions that promote “divisive DEI policies.” Trump, in an address last March at the department, said the changes were necessary after a “surrender to violent criminals” during the past administration and would result in a restoration of “fair, equal and impartial justice under the constitutional rule of law.”

The department prosecuted 32,000 new immigration cases in the first six months of the administration, which was nearly triple the number under the Biden administration and a 15% increase from the first Trump term. It has pursued fewer prosecutions of nearly every other type of crime — from drug offenses to corruption — than new administrations in their first six months dating back to 2009.

The DOJ has also closed hundreds of cases involving alleged crimes that the administration has publicly emphasized as enforcement priorities. Even as the Trump administration unleashed Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency operatives to root out waste, fraud and abuse in the federal government, the DOJ declined over 900 cases of federal program or procurement fraud. About three times as many cases of major fraud against the U.S. were declined under Trump compared with the average of similar time periods under prior administrations. And while the Trump administration has promised to “make America safe again,” its DOJ has declined more than 1,000 terrorism cases, also more than prior administrations.

Federal prosecutor Joseph Gerbasi had spent years in the department’s Narcotic and Dangerous Drug Section helping build cases against major suppliers of fentanyl ingredients in India and China. After Bondi came in, he was left bewildered when his team was ordered to abandon its work.

“All of the building blocks of what would become successful prosecutions were pulled out,” said Gerbasi, who retired as the section’s acting deputy chief for policy in March 2025 after 28 years with the department.

The move had an “overwhelming deflating effect on morale,” he said.

After Trump’s Inauguration, the Department of Justice Turned Down a Record Number of Cases

The first quarter of 2025, and especially February of that year, saw the department declining to prosecute cases against thousands of defendants outside of its regular six-month review process.

Source: DOJ data provided by TRAC Ken Morales/ProPublica

Barbara McQuade, who worked as a federal prosecutor in Michigan for two decades until 2017 during Republican and Democratic administrations, said it was not unusual for new administrations to come to office with a few “pet priorities” — such as a focus on violent crime or drug trafficking. But she said those changes usually involved modest adjustments in policy and that most of the decisions on what crimes to focus on were typically made at the local level by the district U.S. attorney in coordination with the FBI or other agencies.

“We would revise those about every five years, not having anything to do with any administration, just because it made sense,” she said.

A DOJ spokesperson, in an emailed response to questions about the spike in declinations, said that in “an effort to clean, remediate, and validate data in U.S. Attorneys’ case management system,” the department reviewed all pending criminal matters opened prior to the 2023 fiscal year, which included updating the status of closed cases. “This Department of Justice remains committed to investigating and prosecuting all types of crime to keep the American people safe, and the number of declinations is a direct result of our efforts to run the agency in a more efficient manner.”

The agency did not respond to questions about the types of cases declined.

The spike of declined cases began in February 2025 when the department ordered prosecutors to review every open case launched prior to October 2022 and determine whether to close it. Such a review would typically take months, according to one attorney tasked with reviewing cases. A memo, which was described to ProPublica reporters, ordered the review to be completed within 10 days.

Former DOJ prosecutors told ProPublica that they typically reviewed caseloads every six months with supervisors and that closing out languishing cases wouldn’t ordinarily be cause for concern. They said the February directive, however, was unusual. None could recall a similar order.

The directive came as higher-ups in the department had begun making frequent demands for data about specific types of cases and charging decisions, such as the outcome of fentanyl cases, according to former prosecutor Michael Gordon. Gordon, who helped prosecute Jan. 6 cases before moving to white-collar crime prosecutions, said the “fire drills” from officials in Washington became so regular that he grew used to the forlorn look on his supervisor’s face when he showed up at Gordon’s door, apologetically delivering yet another frantic request.

“It was either ‘give us stats we can use to make ourselves look good’ or ‘give us the stats to show how bad things are in this area,’” Gordon said. “It was never productive fact-finding.”

Though Gordon didn’t see the memo, he remembered getting the request to review all cases that had been open for more than two years and report back on their status, entering into a master spreadsheet basic information about any that he wanted to keep pursuing.

“The office was pushing us to close everything by a certain date so that when they had to report up to D.C. they had a low number of open cases,” he said. “You really had to go to bat to keep open a case that was more than two years old.”

Gordon said he was fired by the DOJ last June. He has filed a lawsuit alleging his termination was politically motivated. The department did not respond to questions about Gordon’s comments or his lawsuit. The government filed a motion to dismiss the case late last year, arguing that the federal court did not have jurisdiction over the matter. The court has not yet ruled on that motion, and the case is still pending.

Investigations into individuals or corporations declined for prosecution are generally not reported to courts and usually only disclosed in summary form by the DOJ in annual reports. To conduct its analysis, ProPublica obtained declination data from the DOJ and the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, a center that obtains data through Freedom of Information Act requests.

The DOJ Declined a Slew of Cases Shortly After Pam Bondi Was Confirmed as Attorney General

Nearly 11,000 criminal cases were declined during her first month in office.

Source: DOJ data provided by TRAC Ken Morales/ProPublica

Here are some of the areas most impacted by the spike in declinations.

Drugs

As president, Trump has spoken frequently about the “scourge” of drugs coming into the country. At the same time, the Justice Department has declined to prosecute nearly 5,000 cases of federal drug law violations, including trafficking and money laundering. The number of declinations were 45% higher than the average of the prior three new administrations.

Gerbasi, the counternarcotics prosecutor, declined to comment on specific cases that might have been declined in his office. But, he said, once Bondi was appointed, the priority in the office became building cases against Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan group that the Trump administration has labeled a foreign terrorist organization.

“Tren de Aragua was not anywhere close to the scale or impact of the cartels we were focused on,” Gerbasi said. “But we were told to generate those cases.”

He said his office had to scramble to fly people to investigate local gangs in small towns that were reportedly affiliated with Tren de Aragua. “They never would have merited a full-scale federal investigation,” he said.

“It told me that decisions were going to be based on political appearances and not based on the merits of where investigative resources should be placed.”

The DOJ declined to comment on Gerbasi’s remarks.

Trump’s DOJ Has Rejected Far More Cases Than Previous Administrations Across a Wide Range of Categories

Many of the dropped cases were in programs the DOJ has claimed were priorities.

Source: TRAC, DOJ
Note: “Other” primarily includes government regulatory offenses and theft. Comparison to average of past administrations only includes the first six months after a presidential administration change: Obama (2009), Trump (2017) and Biden (2021)
 Ken Morales/ProPublica

National Security

Under Bondi, the DOJ declined more than 1,300 cases involving terrorism and national security, nearly twice what was typical at the start of the most recent new administrations. While domestic terrorism was the hardest-hit program, just over 300 cases involving charges of providing material support to foreign terrorist organizations were also dropped.

The DOJ program handling matters relating to national internal security — which considers cases of alleged spy activity and the security of classified information — saw over 200 declinations, which is four times as many as typical in the first six months of a new administration. Some of the cases related to serving as an unregistered foreign agent, a charge Bondi ordered prosecutors to stop pursuing unless they involved “conduct similar to more traditional espionage by foreign government actors.”

Jimmy Gurulé, a former federal prosecutor and George W. Bush appointee to the U.S. Treasury Department who investigated the financing of terrorism, said the decline in terrorism cases was troubling.

“The Trump DOJ has been used as a political weapon,” he said. “It’s a question of prioritizing resources. Are they going to be used for national security threats or to prosecute his political enemies and critics?” The DOJ did not respond to a request for comment on Gurulé’s remarks.

Labor

The DOJ shut down over 60 union corruption and labor racketeering cases, 2.5 times the number in Trump’s first term. Nearly half of the cases turned down for those offenses were out of the New Jersey U.S. attorney’s office, which in the past has aggressively pursued alleged union corruption. All were noted as declined for insufficient evidence.

Most of those cases had been opened by Grady O’Malley, an assistant U.S. attorney who oversaw several prosecutions of union corruption while working in the New Jersey office over four decades. He retired in 2023 and was disturbed to learn from former colleagues that the office was shutting down the open union probes.

A Trump supporter, O’Malley said that while he doesn’t blame the president, he worries the decision to drop so many cases could embolden unions that he and his colleagues spent years working to hold accountable. “No one is assigned to do labor union cases, and the unions have every reason to believe no one is looking.”

The New Jersey U.S. attorney’s office said it had no comment on the declination of labor cases.

White-Collar Crime

The Trump administration has pledged to root out “rampant” fraud in federal benefit programs like food stamps and welfare. The controversial surging of federal agents to Minnesota in January began as a stated crackdown on noncitizens allegedly ripping off nutrition and child care programs.

The DOJ, however, shut down more than 900 cases of federal program or procurement fraud in the first six months of the administration, including one targeting a mortgage lender accused by several state regulators of defrauding the Federal Housing Administration. The case was dropped due to “prioritization of federal resources and interests.” The U.S. attorney’s office for the Northern District of Alabama, which declined the case, did not reply to a request for comment. The number of fraud cases closed was about double that in the same time period of the Biden and first Trump administrations.

The agency also closed over 100 health care fraud cases as a result of “prioritization of resources and interests” even though the Trump administration has said it is making this area of enforcement a priority.

Among other cases the DOJ determined weren’t a priority: the probe into the Virginia nursing home accused of abuse, as well as investigations in Tennessee into fraud at a national hospital chain and one of the largest Medicaid managed care companies.

The Western District of Virginia U.S. attorney’s office, through a spokesperson, declined to comment on the nursing home case. A spokesperson for the U.S. attorney in the Middle District of Tennessee said the office does not comment on investigations that do not result in public charges.

The DOJ’s Antitrust Division, which focuses on preventing big businesses from creating harmful monopolies, also declined an unusually high number of cases in Trump’s second term. More than 40 cases were dropped within the first six months of Bondi’s tenure. That’s more than double the number declined in the same time period by the prior three new administrations.

Despite the declinations, the department said it charged slightly more people with fraud in 2025 compared with the final year of the Biden administration, and those cases alleged larger financial losses.

Promises Kept

The DOJ under Bondi has also rapidly pursued many of the priorities laid out in Trump’s early executive orders and her own “first day” directives to staff.

Trump in February 2025 issued an executive order pausing new investigations under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which prohibits citizens and companies from bribing foreign entities to advance their business interests. The order asked the attorney general to review and “take appropriate action” on any existing probes to “preserve Presidential foreign policy prerogatives.”

In the first six months, Bondi’s DOJ shut down 25 such cases, which is more than the combined number dropped by the prior three new administrations over the same time period. One of the cases declined for prosecution involved a major car manufacturer, which had reported possible anti-bribery violations to federal investigators involving a foreign subsidiary. The DOJ declined the case for prosecution last June, citing the “prioritization of federal resources and interests.”

On her first day, Bondi ordered a review of criminal prosecutions under the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances, or FACE Act, which prohibits people from illegally blocking access to abortion clinics and places of worship. The department dropped as many cases under the act in its first six months as the past three new administrations combined, over the same time frame. Bondi’s order focused on “non-violent protest activity,” although at least one of the closed cases was being investigated as a violent crime. The DOJ has since charged protesters against Immigration and Customs Enforcement and journalists in Minneapolis under the FACE Act. The defendants in the case have pleaded not guilty.

The agency closed three times the number of cases alleging environmental crimes as the Biden administration did and one-and-a-half times as many as compared with Trump’s first term. The declinations came as the DOJ reassigned and cut prosecutors working on environmental cases. One-fifth of all of the dropped environmental protection cases were shut down for “prioritization of federal resources and interests.”

Platner Is CRUSHING Maine’s Senate Primary

I know about the ginned up outrage dragged up by the Mills campaign.  The dozens of years ago old Reddit posts that Platner responded to head on, explained, and I have seen him with women around him and he doesn’t act like a misogynist. He doesn’t try to justify the comments and denounces them.  He does explain the mindset at the time he wrote them.  A man in a male dominated macho military infantry unit who had been in combat was letting off steam in writing, not acting physically.  He doesn’t believe that stuff now but the internet is a forever machine.  He has changed from that angry young man into a thoughtful adult.  If I were in Maine I could clearly see what he brings to the table vrs what Mills does.  I strongly support Platner.  Hugs

Let’s talk about Trump bending the knee to Putin again….

tRump claims he would let any country send oil to Cuba.  That is not true.  Canadawanted to send supplies and oil and tRump threatened them to back down.  Mexico was going to supply oil to Cuba and tRump threatened to destroy the ships and attack Mexico, so they backed down.  But when Putin sent oil, tRump totally ignored it and claimed to have wanted it.  I do not know what Putin has on tRump but it has to be more than the Epstein files.  It has to be something that could totally ruin him, his father, and his kids. Also Russia is openly helping Iran and yet tRump removed the oil sanctions to give them more money to continue to batter Ukraine while tRump stopped direct shipments of military supplies needed by Ukraine some time ago.  The Europeans picked up the slack by buying the US military arms to send to Ukraine themselves. tRump is now refusing to honor the 750 million dollars worth of paid for orders of these countries to instead send the arms to the Middle East.  Again what does Putin have on tRump and so many in our congress?  Hugs.